Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28522906›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2017

Magnetic anchor guidance for endoscopic submucosal dissection and other endoscopic procedures.

Mohamed Mortagy, Neal Mehta, Mansour A Parsi, Seiichiro Abe, Tyler Stevens, John J Vargo, Yutaka Saito, Amit Bhatt

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Experimental study of magnetic hydrogel assisted magnetic anchorguided endoscopic submucosal dissection in colonic tumors.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Comparable Data Between Double Endoscopic Intraluminal Operation and Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Esophageal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamed MortagyMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Neal MehtaMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Mansour A ParsiMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Seiichiro AbeMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Tyler StevensMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
John J VargoMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Yutaka SaitoMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Amit BhattMohamed Mortagy, Department of Internal Medicine, Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008, United States.
Western Michigan University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a well-established, minimally invasive treatment for superficial neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. The universal adoption of ESD has been limited by its slow learning curve, long procedure times, and high risk of complications. One technical challenge is the lack of a second hand that can provide traction, as in conventional surgery. Reliable tissue retraction that exposes the submucosal plane of dissection would allow for safer and more efficient dissection. Magnetic anchor guided endoscopic submucosal dissection (MAG-ESD) has potential benefits compared to other current traction methods. MAG-ESD offers

Indexed as

MagnetsAnimalsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionEquipment DesignGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHumansMagneticsNatural Orifice Endoscopic SurgeryTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic submucosal dissectionEsophageal cancerGastric cancerMagnetic anchor guidanceMagnetsNatural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgeryTraction

Identifiers

PMID28522906
PMCPMC5413783
OpenAlexW2607668010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.